Draft v2 Workstation WG Governance Charter

[Owen Taylor]

I'm perfectly fine with the draft as is:

 * In terms of adding a timeline for voting - seems fine for me.

 * -1 for using trac; the idea is that most real work happens *without* voting. We have to be able to have productive discussions on the mailing list. If the mailing list is too cluttered with user questions or whatever so that voting gets drowned out, then we'll need create a separate mailing list that we police to be on-topic. We can definitely see how things work out and adapt, but the fewer different communication channels that we have to monitor the better! I think using trac also means that it's hard for people with a casual interest to follow discussions.

 * For the language "The Work Group is highly  encouraged to seek out candidates that have been showing persistent and high quality contribution to the Workstation product." to me, this language reflects that the point of the group is to create the Workstation product and doesn't prohibit the group from also inviting members who contribute to related areas. (If they are willing to help out with planning and decision making for the Workstation product.) I dislike the "one of Fedora's desktops" language, because the point of the group *is not* to create a collection of desktops. I'm OK with "contribution to Workstation technology in Fedora" if that makes people more comfortable - though the original is better.

----- Original Message -----
> Hi All,
> 
> The charter is due this Friday, November 15.  We have two comments
> from Jens on this draft, one for suggesting a voting timeframe of
> within a week of an official proposal, the other for possibly using
> trac for voting.  I'm fine with the timeframe, and I don't care either
> way on trac or what I have in the draft below.
> 
> Please review and either approve or make suggested changes.
> 
> josh
> 
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Here's the second draft of the charter.  I think I captured most of
> > the discussion to date, but there's always a chance I missed
> > something.  Please read this over and provide any feedback you have.
> > Please pay particular attention to the (NOTE:) items.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > josh
> >
> > == Fedora Workstation WG Governance ==
> >
> > This document describes the governing structure for the Fedora
> > Workstation Work Group.
> >
> > === Membership ===
> >
> > The Fedora Workstation Work Group has nine voting members, with one
> > member selected by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee as the
> > liaison to FESCo.
> >
> > The FESCo liaison is always a member of the decision making group for
> > the Work  Group.  The liaison is responsible for presenting the WG
> > decisions and summary of WG discussions to FESCo on a regular basis.
> > They will also take feedback or requirements from FESCo back to the
> > WG.  The liaison is not required to be a  FESCo member, but should be
> > able to regularly attend the FESCo meetings.
> >
> > Members of the Work Group are chosen by the Work Group as seats become
> >  available.  In the event that a current member relinquishes their
> > seat, the Work Group will fill the seat by selecting a candidate and
> > approving by majority consensus.  Eligible candidates must be in the
> > FPCA+1 group.  The Work Group is highly  encouraged to seek out
> > candidates that have been showing persistent and high quality
> > contribution to the Workstation product.
> >
> > (NOTE: I believe this is a decent encapsulation of the discussion
> > we've had thus far.  I've omitted term limits for now, but I'm open to
> > suggestions.  The FPCA+1 requirement seems reasonable to me as we want
> > to make sure they're a Fedora contributor first and foremost.
> > Suggestions/questions welcome.)
> >
> > === Current Members ===
> >
> > * Josh Boyer (FESCo Liaison) (jwb)
> > * Matthias Clasen (mclasen)
> > * Kalev Lember (kalev)
> > * Ryan Lerch (ryanlerch)
> > * Jens Petersen (juhp)
> > * Christian Schaller (cschalle)
> > * Owen Taylor (otaylor)
> > * Lukáš Tinkl (ltinkl)
> > * Christoph Wickert (cwickert)
> >
> > === Making Decisions ===
> >
> > Because Fedora is a global project, members of the working group may
> > be distributed across multiple timezones. It may be possible to have a
> > real-time IRC meetings, but  in general we will conduct business on
> > the mailing list.
> >
> > Many of our decisions can be made through "lazy consensus";. Under
> > this model, an intended action is announced on the mailing list,
> > discussed, and in the absence of a group of dissenting contributors
> > within a few days, simply done.
> >
> > For bigger issues, where there may be disagreement, or where there is
> > long-term  impact, or where an action may not easily be undone, we
> > will put forth a formal  proposal on the mailing list with a
> > "[Proposal for Vote] header in the email Subject:  field.  Working
> > group members can vote +1 to approve, -1 to disagree, or 0 to abstain;
> > five +1 votes are necessary for a measure to pass. Non-members may
> > comment on the item and (of course) discuss on the mailing list, but
> > are asked to refrain from  putting votes on official proposal threads.
> >
> > In the event that a live meeting is held in IRC to discuss an issue,
> > proposals will be done in much the same way.  A member will put forth
> > an official proposal by prefixing a summary of such with "Proposal:"
> > and WG members will vote as above.  Results will be recorded and
> > posted in any meeting minutes.
> >
> > (NOTE: I chose option #2 from the previous draft for now.  If you'd
> > like to see something different, please speak up.  I don't believe
> > anyone commented on this section specifically.)
> >
> > === Changing these Rules ===
> >
> > This document will be approved by consensus of the initial Working
> > Group members and approved by FESCo. After initial ratification, any
> > substantive changes can be approved by majority vote and sent to FESCo
> > for acceptance.
>